[MD] Step two

[Ant McWatt]

> On Aug 11, 2014, at 7:38 PM, Ant McWatt wrote:

"It's a subtle SOM habit (certainly for a Westerner) to think of rocks and trees and all the other inorganic & biological patterns as somehow being MORE real than social & intellectual patterns but Northrop shows us this is scientifically & logically incorrect.  This is why I think the MOQ perspective - though unnatural at first for someone brought up in an SOM dominated culture - is a more coherent and therefore BETTER one to hold."

http://moq.robertpirsig.org/
 

Ron Kulp commented on the above, August 12th 2014:

"That's another useful term, to "hold" a perspective. In land surveying When we try to give meaning to descriptions, we say we "Hold" certain physical and abstract Evidence for particular reasons. Our reasons are subjected to peer
And legal Review. Where am I going with this?"

"I guess I see a lot of similarities With orientation, when we hold Particular values for particular reasons we orient the way we Think and perceive, we lend a greater Broader meaning to the mosaic of Value in experience. In boundary survey the term  "to hold" is an act Based on careful reflection, the act Of reference or source of belief."

Ant McWatt comments:

Ron, I didn't know that land surveyors used that phrase "to hold" as well. Interesting coincidence...  Anyway, I think a helpful way of looking at this issue is to use the map analogies introduced by Ron DiSanto in the first chapter of the "Guidebook to ZMM":

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/26/books/books-of-the-times-retracing-the-tire-prints-on-a-philosophical-journey.html


SOM is a particular map of the Human World, the MOQ is another one as is Roman Catholicism, Atheism and the many other "isms" that people have invented over the eons.  The MOQ is relatively a new map so (thanks to the genius of its creator, Robert Pirsig) takes into account many aspects of the contemporary world (from using technology to East Asian philosophy to the nature of celebrity) that older maps DON'T take proper account of or, worse still, miss all together.  

Does this make sense?

Ant


.